What Letcher Hatsis Got Right

I did not realize the extent to which the entire field of Entheogen Scholarship had become completely corrupted and taken over entirely by the secret Amanita paradigm

I did not realize that when Carl Ruck quoted me saying “mixed wine is mushroom wine” that he interpreted the word ‘Mushroom’ differently than me.

I meant Psilocybin, but Ruck meant 🍄.

which I consider to be fundamentally different!

🤯

there is no way that I can imagine Amanita producing the clean loose cognitive effect which psilocybin is the benchmark standard reference for producing

I consider Amanita as a dirty, questionable, unknown, inconsistent, non-targeted effect.

and if we build our thinking around amanita, then our thinking is dirty, non-specific, non-targeted, confused, and unfocused, and inadequately loosened, in adequately, insufficiently inspired

I had no idea that when people were reading my pull quote in Carl Ruck’s book where I wrote “mixed wine is mushroom wine”, I had no idea that people were reading my Maximal statement as if I had written “mixed wine is amanita wine”.

What I meant was, the Maximal *Psilocybin* theory of mixed wine – but what people mistakenly read was, the Maximal *Amanita* theory of mixed wine!

totally different!

completely different!

What Letcher Hatsis Got Wrong

The overreaction of letcher hatsus is to solve the problem by completely and totally rejecting all versions of mushroom hypothesis in Christian history.

instead of them rightly deleting and replacing the bad old theory by a good new theory of the role of mushrooms and Christian history, what they did instead- they’re trying to replace the bad old theory by no theory, which is to say, by a firm assertion that there were no mushrooms whatsoever

by which in their confused thinking, = 🍄

then when they assert “no psilocybin in Christian history”, they argue that on a *completely different* basis

that is a completely different subject in their pop minds

where

the popular mind is not driven by thinking and explicit assertions, but rather, by loose emotional connotations and word association, in a hypnotic-like state, Pop Trance.

Letcher Hatsis , on a rough first order of approximation, makes some five assertions:

1) assertion number one :

the [Moderate entheogen theory] secret Amanita paradigm has completely corrupted and taken over the field of entheogen scholarship.

at a level 1 approximation, he is correct.

2) assertion number two:

there is no amanita[=”mushrooms”] in Christian history.

his assertion is false, but to a large extent a matter of degree, he is right.

there is much less Amanita in Christian history than the predominant paradigm asserts and assumes and presumes.

3) his third assertion is :

there is no Psilocybin in England or Europe or Mediterranean Antiquity until 1975 , and so there simply is no conversation about Psilocybin in christian and History. ug ug ug word salad emotional notion pop connotation “anachronism”. 😑

just like Wasson says that in the topic of mycology, there is no room for discussing the planecorral fresco; it has no place in discussion Within the field of mycology, because plaincruel fresco does not depict mushrooms.

similarly, Letcher Hatsis says that the topic of psilocybin has no place in a discussion of Christian history, because that is “anachronistic”.

for example, Psilocybin didn’t even exist in England until, due to false popular history, it was brought there in 1975.

We are not to read this as a straightahead assertion of sober factual statement, but rather, he is channeling the emotional gut connotation pop mental association notions, and we see it written in ink here in his book, but it is – do not mistake this as a factual type straightahead assertion; read it as channeling the pop, confused “mind”.

“Magic Mushrooms” & slop pop associations 🍄

We need to explicitly relate and explain: how do we jump from red and white popular Amanita, which we call “magic Mushrooms”, over to the separate, *very different* species and chemical, Psilocybin?

why is it that everyone puts forward the *picture* images of amanita, but zero people ingest Amanita, and 100% of people ingest Psilocybin instead?

Explain that, and then we will use that to explain why amanita in Christian art does *not* mean literally ingesting Amanita, but it means ingesting Psilocybin instead, due to the innate poor efficiency of amanita, combined with its high visual appeal.

Idea development technology technique

technique for making my ideas thinking visible making thought visible at high-speed efficiently:

I now need to turn off the beep function of voice dictation, because I am recording Egodeath Mystery show episode right now and the two mics are picking up the beeping … success; I just had to turn down the volume while it’s in the voice recording dictation voice dictation mode. voice dictation beeping is still on but super super faint.